|December 11, 1912||B.R.C. File No. 20855 (Train service at Washago) (Ottawa)|
Grand Trunk Railway System
Montréal, December 11th, 1912.
Mr. W. H. Biggar
Replying to your letter of November 11, file 13324 in regard to complaint of J. H. Thompson of Bracebridge to the Board of Railway Commissioners concerning interchange of passenger traffic with the Canadian Northern at Washago, Ont.
Washago has a population of about 150 and two of our trains in each direction stop at that point. So far as local conditions are concerned there is therefore adequate accommodation. However, the complaint concerns transfer to and from the Canadian Northern Ontario Ry.
The principal object this complaint is to secure connection for passengers on our line via Canadian Northern Ontario Railway to Parry Sound and other points in competition with the Grand Trunk via Scotia Junction. Canadian Northern train No. 6 is due at Washago at 5.57 p.m.; G.T. No. 6 at 3.50 p.m. and G.T. No. 65 at 4.53 p.m. which afford ample margin for transfer. I enclose statement showing the running of G.T. and C.N.O. trains for period from Nov. 12th to Nov. 18th, inclusive, also the number of passengers transferred, but would emphasize the fact that this was the hunting season and therefore transfer abnormal. No. 64 is due by Washago at 11.29 a.m. and during this period ran as follows:
November 12th 19" late 13th 30" late 14th 23" late 15th On time 16th 28" late 18th 6" late
Canadian Northern train No. 1 is due at 11.45 a.m. daily and during this period did not pass Washago until after 12.00 noon.
If No. 64 were stopped at Washago, it would mean at least 5 minutes delay to that train, with corresponding delay to trains No. 61 and 3 at meeting point and as No. 64 has during the summer boat connections at Muskoka Wharf, it would certainly mean serious delay to important through connections, which the transfer at Washago would not justify. The statement of passenger transfer on Nov. 16th shows 35 to our line, but special arrangements were made for theDeer Specialrunning ahead of No. 46, to stop for their accommodation. We certainly object to changing the schedule of Nos. 65 and 68 as this would only result in embarrassment and inconvenience to a large portion of the travelling public at points more important than connections at Washago and undoubtedly transfer this grievance from the patrons now delivered to us by the Canadian Northern, to those whom the Canadian Northern would receive from us.
The present schedules are the result of experience and careful study of conditions the object being to afford accommodation to the largest number and should remain unchanged. I enclose copy of letter from Passenger Traffic Manager Davis for your additional information.
Howard G. Kelley